The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-06-28
THE SHARP TRIAL.
The Old Man Totters Into Court and the Law
yers for the Defense Begin Their Work.


yers for the Defense Begin Their Work.
NEW YORK, June 27.--Jacob Sharp tottered
into court this morning looking weird and worn.
The reason for this was that he passed terrible
night, not even getting much sleep as was his
lot Saturday night Mrs. Sharp. who had been
privileged to remain with him, had not rested
one moment during the night. With the begin
ming of the reading of his testimony. before the
Senate investigation committee. Sharp opened
his lustreless eyes and attempted to interest
himself in the proceedings.
The first business of the session was to again
adjourn the June Oyer and Terminer to Monday.
July II, after which Harrison d. Kerr, of
the Seventh-avenue railroad directors. was called
as a witness for the prosecution, but he failing
to respond, Senate Stenographer Correll was re-
called to the stand, while the balance Of the tes
timony of Sharp before the Senate committee, or
SO much thereof as the prosecution desired, was
read by Mr.. Nicoll. Mr.. Nicoll finished reading
the testimony at 1117 o'clock and the people
rested their case.
Ex.Alderman Fullgraff came into court this
morning and had short private conference
with Peter Mitchell, of counsel for the defense;
he then hurried out closely followed by the dis
trict attorney, who acted though he was fear
full that the States best witness going to
turn traitor, and he must do something to pre-
vent it. A ten minutes rest was taken, after
the prosecution closed after which Mr.. Parsons
began the opening address for the defense. He
said that the duty had fallen upon him to open
for the defense, out, before he proceeded to do
so. he had two motions to make that he desired
to appear on the record. First. ask the
prosecution to elect whether it would stand upon
that part Of the Indictment charging an agree
ment to bride Fullgraff that part alleging
that he in fact bribed by Sharp. Second,
that the court advise the jury to acquit the de-
PENDANT. as the case now stands, under Section
40 of the code of criminal procedure. Both
motions were denied and exceptions taken. Mr..
Parsons then opened, as follows:
''If there has been any expectation that coun-
sci for the defense supposed that this
TO be won by the use of elegant rhetoric. by elo-
quent appeals to the sympathy of the jurors,
that expectation will be hardly realized by any
thing l shall have to say. My duty Is simply to
state the defendants case and review the testi-
mony before YOU / ask your forbearance now,
because the defense, for the first time, has
right to be heard. 1t is great embarrassment
of a defense in every case that the prosecution
has the right to put its case and make impress
sions that may find Judgment in jurors minds
that are difficult to remove. I may we'll cay
here what shall have say hereafter. that this
large mass CT evidence. known by all
men. which has been introduced by
might recite Mr.. Sharp's transactions. as did
the learned assistant district attorney. from the
beginning, to prove to you Mr. Sharp's inno-
cence, but that would take too much of your
time. 1 will simply review some Of the evil
dence. No evidence has been produced of direct
implication OF Mr.. Sharp in this alleged bribery,
and the prosecution acknowledges its inability
to connect them. It simply claims that there
are circumstances which point to his guilt, and
prove it. as it says"
Mr.. Parsons dwelt upon the fact that the jury
had gone into the box with opinions or impress
sions against Mr. Sharp, but nevertheless the
defendant had right to expect that they would
do what they had sworn to do: find a verdict.
according to the evidence. He said: you re-
member that you are not trying Pearson. Miller.
Fullgraf, any of the twenty two indicted
aldermen. You are trying Jacob Sharp for de-
bauching Alderman Fullgraf, and it is charged
that he the arch-cons pirator-the principal
and agent of this action"
Mr.. Parsons strongly opposed to the read
ing of Mr.. Sharps testimony before the Senate
Investigating committee, thus making him, con-
trarv to law, witness against himself Said
he: But. under all the disadvantages surround
ing him, he denied that he had any connection
with the $500. 900 which the prosecution say
a corruption fund. We will put Dir. Bliss
the stand to tell why he advised Mr. Sharp to
testify, and he will say that after consulting
with the most eminent lawyers they all agreed
that what he said there could not be used against
him. The prosecution say there was an agree
ment between Sharp and the aldermen. This
they have not proved The law says you cannot
convict the uncorroborated evidence OF
accomplish. Where. in all this case, is there any
confederation of the informer2"
Mr. Parsons argued that all the sums alleged
to have been paid out as a corruption fund did
not agree with the proof offered by the prosecu-
ton, which must be accepted by the jury as q
proof of innocence. The speaker commended that
the testimony of the legislative clerk that Sharp
offered him S., 900 to interpolate certain words
in a street railroad bill was absolutely false,
whereas counsel will produce the bill itself from
Albany and prove that Shapes contention
that there was something in the bill which ought
to have been taken II SHALL" continued
counsel, submit witness to you who knows
all about the transactions connected with the
broadway enterprise down to the meeting of
the board aldermen. l shall have him tell you
the story connectedly, not GiscoDnectedy, the
prosecution did. In reference to the prepara-
ton for the early morning meeting there was q
great deal of romance INDUCED in about it."
Mr.. Parsons concluded his address with an APP
peal to the jury not to be influenced by anything
but tho evidence in determining their verdict
He had spoken for almost five hours
The first witness called for the defense was
John M. Scribner, of johnson. Scribner d
Bright, counsel for the Broadway surface rail
road. He began TO give the history of the efforts
made to get franchise for Broadway railroad,
but was interrupted by an objection from Assist
ant District Attorney Nichol, who claimed that
the people had put in all the evidence necessary
on that point.
Charles Fl. Hooper was then called and pro-
duced the railroad bill of 1883 and its veto by
Governor Cleveland.
Charles r. Dayton. journal clerk of the AS
sembly, gave history of the introduction and
passage of the bill of 1884 He was on the stand
when the hour of adjournment arrived.
A PLEA FOR LAMONT